Re: BUG #18822: mailing lists reject mails due to DKIM-signature
От | Matthias Apitz |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BUG #18822: mailing lists reject mails due to DKIM-signature |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Z73T9b6uH8gzJJWY@c720-1400094 обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BUG #18822: mailing lists reject mails due to DKIM-signature (Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan@kaltenbrunner.cc>) |
Ответы |
Re: BUG #18822: mailing lists reject mails due to DKIM-signature
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
El día martes, febrero 25, 2025 a las 03:03:33p. m. +0100, Stefan Kaltenbrunner escribió: > Hi Matthias! > > On 25.02.25 14:30, Matthias Apitz wrote: > > My provider informed me and I see that they modified the DKIM signing > > to: > > > > DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=unixarea.de > > ; s=blu3434000; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:MIME-Version: > > Reply-To:Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date:Sender:Cc:Content-ID: > > Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc > > :Resent-Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: > > List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; > > bh=mUXCo4CB5VS0jsNsC2LeR8NOxLomD73G556GgsVmluA=; b=K2hfkuZCi802dfTu0VVFH8Hyjs > > HtCy32IT5zriGVENgNVCIgaFBWAQsD7OwsZ5joN0BeiEUAn2f5oBsLPf1HyRmcg9ZWW9b1CF1Nvk3 > > algyaqs2z28yCJQOxASW7HV3f4fY/F1HTSZ81Yr6HBVKAky2Iw5ii5sXnXN2MM9vB9wKirF9qoQnK > > QPQMJMKKP+T5mQ1B7R7pE62RaqivzVTBj4/lca9Jg4QmxZ3ir8W+Dh06pV0MfFR3gilUl4JInHJ3S > > lQFs3XnGBV/24aSzeqePfp9Ogo5ypOUp4/S7JAUVRtPGh9/+E6rXRc02Q1jySLoQTe++ocy/iXY/Z > > hL7XqoEQ==; > > I think you copied the wrong one here ;) - the above snippet actually > contains the previous DKIM-Siganture but the header in your actual mail > looks good! You're correct. This looks like the old one. But when I write to my company account, it is also only this one: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=unixarea.de ; s=blu3434000; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:MIME-Version: Reply-To:Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date:Sender:Cc:Content-ID: Content-Description:In-Reply-To:References; bh=mUXCo4CB5VS0jsNsC2LeR8NOxLomD73G556GgsVmluA=; b=ZYVR5g2i7fFIerrPqWcHSZrYy1 vum6yy3LdF1Gkm/ZUDrgBO+SOYmMXzjf9ZPvjNT5KpNn62UhlPKNFSnZOpWH+ZBGHFRiiRX2SPPu1 v/epIArkhSLXNoWs/UpiHAD+xN5qgA4KmSGuusMsVu1aTePUDRghSF/AbMa5UMYZ92nD4VJ2HSREU obF2tfob0lT0mo3GkXk6Ea83OG2PX4zAwIAI3Zvvf+bbe2pR2hhWeM3Od5pOq4JIDk7BHOom/H7JI X0JjZBnhrZyVHCfZzWzGaCpy4wVuaGU+MFBfBDYV3lY2xIdGxXM1ScoNj2JAKbXKioER2vWMzw4j1 kCDbFhHQ==; How this depends of the mail recipient addr? > > > > So the bug perhaps could be closed. > > nice to hear and glad you found someone to talk to at your ISP to get this > sorted! Or should I ask my ISP? matthias -- Matthias Apitz, ✉ guru@unixarea.de, http://www.unixarea.de/ +49-176-38902045 Public GnuPG key: http://www.unixarea.de/key.pub
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: